So, if Direct Stream converts anything into DSD, would spotify be as good quality as Tidal?


#1

So, if Direct Stream converts anything into DSD, would spotify be as good quality as Tidal?


#2

The conversion process can’t add back things that are lost via lossy compression. I would expect the answer to your question to be “no”. I don’t have Tidal but do have Spotify on trial. It’s not as good as CDs.


#3

You can see multiple places online that there can be differences in quality with the DSD conversion whether you start with 16 bit vs 24 bit data to begin with. Add in lossy compression on top and you can see where this goes.


#4

In my experience, the DSD makes the best of anything fed to it. As the others have said, it can’t make up data, but damn some of my low res mp3 from 20 years ago sound quite respectable processed through it. At least I don’t jump to skip when one of them plays…

I believe the quality of the recording and mastering has more impact on the final sound than the bit rate.


#5

Makes sense. The reason I asked it that I find stream to be sounding better than CD “Chet Baker, Funny Valentine”
And thought to myself, well if DS pulls out missing infor from a CD by breaking down and rebuilding the bit-stream then…well you get it.

Thank you guys

TD


#6

The sound quality of Spotify is easily better than some of the hi-Rez rubbish I have paid for and downloaded.


#7

I find the opposite. I guess every person and system is different.

T


#8

Which goes to show that the most important thing is the source from which the files are made.


#9

I bought a JVC DLA-X9900 the other day…the guy who dropped it off (who is an audiophile, owns Magico S7) had a listen to my 2ch sound system and was blown away by the sound quality. Could not differentiate between DSD64 and Spotify.


#10

hmmph, must be your system then if the delivery guy could tell either.


#11

I assume you meant couldn’t, but it is often very hard to hear small, meaningful to us, things in an unknown system.
I don’t claim to be a golden eared audiophile, but I know some, and when listening for differences, it can take hours. What do you focus on?
I know a audio dealer who runs through a mental checklist.
As far as the Chet Baker preference, do you have any idea if they came from the same master. Early CD releases were often taken from 2nd and 3rd generation copies of the master. The fact that MQA sounds better than the other version, may have more to do with the source, than the processing.
And if we could hear the differences immediately in “your” system, we might want to leave in an hour, as ruthlessly revealing can often bring about listener fatigue, or becomes unpleasant very quickly. So, maybe the “hmmph” was not fair or kind.


#12

I know if wasn’t kind, but I felt his statements was degrading to all those that believe Tidal is better than Spotify. Blanket statements that “Spotify is better than any hi-rez anything, and if you think there is a difference, you must be a moron, see even the mailman couldn’t tell a difference and he loved my system.” I assume you spanked Brod too?

Regardless Im not offended by his statements, I am just reacting to them. I don’t think we need a kindergarten recess monitor defending people whom has entered the public arena. I doubt Brod needs you sticking up for him on the playground.

The differences I hear from spotify to Tidal are Depth and Width of the Soundstage, cohesiveness, forceful impact, detail…you name it, I think it is night and day.

I imagine Brod has a problem with his system and I suggested (seriously) that he contact Ps Audio and get it figured out.

T


#13

You need to reread the post. I don’t think anyone said or thinks that Spotify is better than all hi-res. When people did some analysis they found some hi-res files were just up sampled 16/44.
I have never heard Spotify, but I found that Tidal a year ago, was nothing special. They have done a lot of work on their desktop player, and now I think it is better in every way. Yet I have no way of knowing when I compare a CD to a Tidal file if either one came from the original master, or a copy of a copy.
It can be very hard to hear differences on an unknown system.
And my post wasn’t about defending Brodric, but about pointing out that the original source is often unknown and matters. If someone comes over, hears your system, and can’t tell the difference between two versions of a song, do you immediately think your system needs the help of a PS Audio tech?
I wrote what amounted to 4 paragraphs, but all you took from it was me saying that the “hmmp” was a cheap shot. I am wondering if English is a second language, or if your comprehensive skills are lacking. I would suggest you reread the whole thread, as no one said Spotify was better than Tidal or all hi-res files.


#14

Whatever


#15

My point was…he cant tell the difference on his own system probably because there is a problem with his system…either that or he cant hear

He said the spotify sounded bettwr that the rubbish hi rez music…and this is rediculous on a good system.

I dont want to argue with you…it is a waste of time.

No offense

T


#16

I didn’t take his post as saying that all hi-Rez music is rubbish. I took it as saying that just because it’s hi-res it’s not necessarily great, which I agree with whole heartedly. Personally I have very little bad hi-res music, but I certainly have some MP3’s that are much more engaging than some of the hi-res music I have.


#17

Ahhh ok…i read it totally differently. I see your point.

But why was he suggesting to go back to or try spotify instead of…“watchout for some of those bad hi rez files” ?

But I do see yiu point, but maybe it could read either way.

T


#18

Regardless of how the post can be read, and independent of any suggestion one may or may not agree with, we all need to be respectful.


#19

Insanity


#20

Being respectful of others’ opinions is one of the things that makes this forum a much more pleasant experience than many other audio forums (fora?). It’s a tone that’s set from the top (i.e., Paul).